Read Time: 07 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court has said that merely on the basis of some letters and without recording reasons why the state probe would not be fair and impartial, the high court can not exercise its power to order CBI probe into a matter since it has been consistently held that such an exercise can be directed only in very rare cases.

A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Vishwanathan set aside the Calcutta High Court's division bench order of April 19, 2024, which had declined to interfere with the single bench order of April 9, 2024.

While hearing a writ petition, the high court had directed for an independent probe by the CBI in view of letters to the Minister-in-charge for regularisation of voluntary teachers in Gorkha Territorial Administration.

"The record would reveal that letters were written to the Minister-in-Charge for regularisation of several Voluntary Teachers at par with the other Voluntary Teachers whose engagement/appointment were regularised on the approval of the Education Department of the Government. The record would further reveal that the steps were taken for regularisation of the engagement/appointment of those Voluntary Teachers and the parameters in this regard was also indicated therein which ipso facto leads to an inescapable conclusion that the State proceeded to give sanction and/or regularisation of their services whose appointments were made through an unknown recruitment process," the high court had said.

Acting on an appeal by the West Bengal government, the apex court said that the perusal of the order passed by the single judge of the high court revealed that on receipt of some letters submitted on behalf of the writ petitioner, the single judge bench of the high court had directed that the Special Investigation Team of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) should conduct a preliminary examination and make an analysis of the allegations made in those letters. It was further directed that a report be submitted with regard to the outcome of the said exercise.

The division bench of the high court did not find it necessary to interfere with the order before it, since it felt that only a preliminary examination was directed by the single judge judge bench, the top court noted. 

"No doubt that the High Court, while exercising its powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, is empowered to entrust the investigation to the CBI. However, for doing so, it has to come to a reasoning as to why it finds that the investigation by the State Police is not fair or is partisan," the bench said.

The court emphasised that merely on the basis of some letters, such an exercise is not warranted.

The bench said that the top court has consistently held that such an exercise of entrusting an investigation to the CBI by the High Court has to be done in very rare cases.

"The perusal of the order passed by the single judge of the High Court would reveal that there is not even a whisper as to why he finds the investigation by the State Police to be unfair or partial so as to find it necessary to direct an enquiry to be conducted by the CBI," the court said.

The bench pointed out that for the very same reason, the order passed by the division bench of the high court was also not sustainable in law.

The court allowed the state government's appeal and set aside the order by the single as well as the division bench.

The bench directed the single bench to decide the writ petition in accordance with the law.